L30 controller describes heavy departure traffic as supervisor suggested use of vectors in lieu of R...

Attributes
ACN	659759
Time
Date	200505
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : l30.tracon
State Reference	NV
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : zzz.tower
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Qualification	controller : developmental
Experience	controller military : 4 controller non radar : 12 controller radar : 10 controller supervisory : 1
ASRS Report	659759
Events
Anomaly	other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	none taken : unable
Supplementary
Problem Areas	FAA ATC Human Performance
Primary Problem	FAA
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : l30.tracon

Narrative:

Due to L30 tmu/management not being aware of increased aircraft traffic in the area; tower was running major departure delays. The supervisor on duty at L30 decided it would be a good idea to stop using our vaunted RNAV/GPS departure procedures; and instead have our tower 'fan' departures off the airport by issuing them headings that diverged by 15 degrees or more; depending on their route of flight. The supervisor tried to talk me into allowing this several times while I was working departure; and I politely declined each time. They finally found an fpl that volunteered to work that way; and they moved me out of position. This was potentially a hazardous situation since they were making up the procedures as they went along. It is also very interesting that after yrs of pushing these RNAV procedures that the day they face unusual delay demand; they throw them out the window and revert to vectoring aircraft off the airport. How can they push RNAV procedures as the most effective way to depart las; then throw them out the window at crunch time? They should never have put any controller in the position to work departures using untested; 'make-it-up-as-you-go-along' procedures.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: L30 CTLR DESCRIBES HVY DEP TFC AS SUPVR SUGGESTED USE OF VECTORS IN LIEU OF RNAV DEP PROCS BECAUSE OF UNEXPECTED TFC VOLUME.

Narrative: DUE TO L30 TMU/MGMNT NOT BEING AWARE OF INCREASED ACFT TFC IN THE AREA; TWR WAS RUNNING MAJOR DEP DELAYS. THE SUPVR ON DUTY AT L30 DECIDED IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO STOP USING OUR VAUNTED RNAV/GPS DEP PROCS; AND INSTEAD HAVE OUR TWR 'FAN' DEPS OFF THE ARPT BY ISSUING THEM HDGS THAT DIVERGED BY 15 DEGS OR MORE; DEPENDING ON THEIR RTE OF FLT. THE SUPVR TRIED TO TALK ME INTO ALLOWING THIS SEVERAL TIMES WHILE I WAS WORKING DEP; AND I POLITELY DECLINED EACH TIME. THEY FINALLY FOUND AN FPL THAT VOLUNTEERED TO WORK THAT WAY; AND THEY MOVED ME OUT OF POS. THIS WAS POTENTIALLY A HAZARDOUS SITUATION SINCE THEY WERE MAKING UP THE PROCS AS THEY WENT ALONG. IT IS ALSO VERY INTERESTING THAT AFTER YRS OF PUSHING THESE RNAV PROCS THAT THE DAY THEY FACE UNUSUAL DELAY DEMAND; THEY THROW THEM OUT THE WINDOW AND REVERT TO VECTORING ACFT OFF THE ARPT. HOW CAN THEY PUSH RNAV PROCS AS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO DEPART LAS; THEN THROW THEM OUT THE WINDOW AT CRUNCH TIME? THEY SHOULD NEVER HAVE PUT ANY CTLR IN THE POS TO WORK DEPS USING UNTESTED; 'MAKE-IT-UP-AS-YOU-GO-ALONG' PROCS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

L30 controller describes heavy departure traffic as supervisor suggested use of vectors in lieu of RNAV departure procedures because of unexpected traffic volume.